houston looked slightly more promising this year, but that’s after investing picks in mario williams, jason babin, demeco ryans, amobi okoye, and travis johnson.

cleveland was on the cusp, but just so happened to strike it rich with derek anderson, kellen winslow, and a guy who should have been offensive rookie of the year (joe thomas). cleveland has really improved their o-line over the past two years, plus they added jamal lewis.

a “great” WR is a luxury in the NFL. you don’t start building a team with a WR. you need a good o-line to give the WR time to get downfield. you need a good QB to deliver him the ball. you need a running game to take pressure off them. a WR requires so many variables, it’s insane to say, “hey, we’ll start our rebuilding process with andre johnson…even though we don’t have an accurate QB, our o-line can’t give us time, and our running game can’t create any balance”. it’s absolutely absurd logic.

mike mayock>>> kiper&mcshay

i refuse to give any credit to an “expert” who routinely suggests teams pick a WR in the top 5. those teams are bad enough as it is, they need guys on the field at all times contributing….not WR’s who have an impact on 3 or 4 plays a game (as 64 catches by a rookie would be considered very good).

depends on the team. braylon edwards was a great pick for the browns, andre johnson was a great pick for the texans, roy williams (i know not top 5, but close) was a great pick for detroit, larry fitz is doing mightee fine in zona. depends on the team’s philosophy and personnel situation. and, please, no rush to judgement, if a WR goes apeshit in his 3rd year, how is that a bad pick?

I vote for Mel.

i refuse to give any credit to an “expert” who routinely suggests teams pick a WR in the top 5. those teams are bad enough as it is, they need guys on the field at all times contributing….not WR’s who have an impact on 3 or 4 plays a game (as 64 catches by a rookie would be considered very good).

thus my view of kiper is damaged for all time. he’s a complete bum.